[Labs-l] Licensing: CC vs. ODbL vs. ???

[aude]

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Tomasz Finc <tfinc at wikimedia.org> wrote:

> The mobile team needs to know how to proceed as well. We use OSM tiles
> for our near by view within the Wikipedia app.
>

They haven't updated their rendering yet to use OBDL data.  It still needs
to say CC-BY-SA for now.

Cheers,
Katie


>
> --tomasz
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Andrew Bogott <abogott at wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >     On IRC this morning, jongleur points out that OpenStreetMap no longer
> > uses CC-by-SA; their data is now licensed under ODbL.  There's a lengthy
> > explanation of the rationale for the change here:
> > http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/We_Are_Changing_The_License
> >
> >     Currently the labs Terms of Use says " all content must be freely
> > licensable under an applicable creative commons license."  That seems to
> > exclude OSM data, which surely is not our intent.  I note that the item
> just
> > before that (about software licenses) uses a more expansive term, "
> > OSI-approved open source licenses."  Is there a similar umbrella term
> that
> > we can use for content that would include CC-like licenses without
> > restricting users to actual, literal CC licensing?
> >
> > -Andrew
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Labs-l mailing list
> > Labs-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Labs-l mailing list
> Labs-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
>



-- 
Board member, Wikimedia District of Columbia
http://wikimediadc.org
@wikimediadc / @wikimania2012
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/labs-l/attachments/20120928/69b05162/attachment.html>